Throwback Thursday Review: 'Spider-Man 3'

This review's a few days late because I wanted to be sure I got my Triple-R over Guardians of the Galaxy and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 review uploaded and I had other prior conflicting commitments. To make up for the delayed review I'm going to be reviewing the entire Alien Anthology prior to Alien: Covenant's release next week. Anyways, this week I'm reviewing Spider-Man 3 to tie into Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 as a Marvel release this past weekend and simultaneously advance my series of Spider-Man reviews swinging into July's Spider-Man: Homecoming. I'll go ahead and give you a head's up that this review will include spoilers but the film is ten years old at this point so if you haven't seen it yet then it's not really a big deal. For the remainder of May I'll be publishing Throwback Thursday Reviews over Despicable Me, Prometheus, and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Retrospective Reviews for the Alien Anthology, and new reviews including King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, Alien: Covenant, Baywatch, and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales.

'Spider-Man 3' Review

Spider-Man 3 serves as the concluding chapter for this iteration of the web-head. Resuming immediately after the events of Spider-Man 2, Peter Parker is just getting into the swing of balancing his dual identities only to have danger looming overhead once more. Spider-Man 3 is a widely maligned feature, failing to materialize into a thrilling threequel and cap off an incredible superhero trilogy. Sam Raimi returned to direct and lent his hand to penning Spidey's third screenplay. Raimi's creative lens helps to steer Spider-Man 3 away from being a total disaster but his touch wasn't enough to completely save the venture.  

Raimi and cinematographer Bill Pope were able to construct at least one great scene to juxtapose nearly every atrocity captured but none of it really makes up for the fact that Spider-Man 3 shouldn't have turned out this badly. Spider-Man 3's main issue is its insistence on being three different films featuring three (a case could be made for four) different antagonists that were forcibly interwoven into one overcooked mess. The script comes from the brain trust of previous script spinner Alvin Sargent, Sam and Ivan Raimi. 

There are plenty of story components to pick apart but I'd say the most pressing problem was an overcrowded story that didn't particularly service any of the characters. For starters, Peter's facing at least three sources of conflict and that's an overwhelming amount to resolve in two and a half hours, give or take. There's the pre-established quarrel between Peter and Harry and the introduction of Sandman and Venom, the latter of which never quite jive into Spider-Man 3's natural narrative. You'd think that the sensible direction to follow would be for Harry to take the mantle of being Spidey's big baddie considering the groundwork has been lain in two prior franchise entries. 

However, Sony seemed to really want to force Venom into it (this is still evident today with plans to release a standalone Venom movie next year) and Raimi must have been dying to play around with Sandman. It's not that these villains are all terrible, rather the fact that they weren't all pertinent to the story at hand and don't fit well together. 

This is especially evident in the design and layout of the film. First, Harry's the threat until he suddenly gets amnesia. Then Sandman comes out of nowhere to bring everything full circle regarding the death of Uncle Ben till he's temporarily disposed. Eddie Brock fills the void of Peter's workplace rival at the Daily Bugle and the symbiote arises as a symbol of Peter's inner conflict. Eventually the two join forces to become Venom but till that point remain separate sources of conflict. 

One common thing you'll notice is that no more than three of these antagonists are adversarial towards Peter at once. The threats work but only two or three at a time due to the constraints of the narrative, almost like a game of Whack-A-Mole. Fifteen minutes into the film Harry gets amnesia so he's friendly till he regains his memories. During that time Sandman resurges, Eddie Brock threatens his livelihood, and the symbiote latches onto Peter in his most troubling time. Sandman is almost immediately disposed of (for the time being) and the symbiote gets put away for a bit. Harry regains his memories and Brock continues to be a jerk at work. Peter pulls out the symbiote again and fights Harry once he realizes his memories have resurfaced. When Harry's defeated, he remains on the sidelines. Sandman re-emerges and Brock and the symbiote coalesce into Venom. 

That's not even mentioning the string of plot-holes in between or the cringeworthy mess that is emo Peter Parker dancing at a jazz club... 

Believe it or not though, there are actually redeeming aspects to Spider-Man 3 if you know where to look such as the fights between Sandman and Peter, Peter's second confrontation with Harry, Harry's sacrifice, J. Jonah Jameson, or simply the fact that the black symbiote suit looks wickedly awesome. However, all these stand-out sequences or memorable moments are paired with an equally atrocious scene so it all kinda evens out when it's all said and done. The visual effects are inconsistent to say the least with gorgeous renderings opposed to disgusting digitized avatars and inadequate green screen work. It almost makes you wish they had gone the Spider-Man route, utilizing more practical effects or at least cut out a few baddies to conserve the budget. Elsewhere, Christopher Young stepped up to the plate after Danny Elfman bolted and I've gotta say he did a commendable job at composing some beautiful pieces to coincide with Elfman's pre-existing heroic anthems. 

For anyone that's followed my reviews of the two predecessors, you should be well aware I'm not a fan of Tobey Maguire in the role of Spider-Man. Maguire purely lacks charisma when he puts on the suit so I never buy the dual identity dynamic of Peter Parker/Spider-Man and his stint with the symbiote this time around is painful to watch. I'll admit he's got the awkwardness of Parker down to a tee, just no other aspect of his personality. 

Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane is once again relegated to her familiar damsel duties and she's fine at that I guess. However, I personally would have rather seen Mary Jane do anything else than be exploited by the villain for a nefarious scheme to ensnare Spider-Man for the third consecutive time. 

James Franco is probably the only returning cast member who I feel truly grew as an actor over the course of making these movies. Franco provides one of the better performances in the crowded ensemble, finally letting Harry's malevolent side loose, and Franco found a nice balance between being friend and fiend. Other retuning mainstays include J.K. Simmons and Rosemary Harris as Daily Bugle's irksome editor and the tender, supportive aunt. Newcomers include Thomas Hayden Church, Bryce Dallas Howard, and Topher Grace. Church brings terrific concealed tragedy to Flint Marko, making Sandman stand out as one of the more compelling characters among the group. Howard offers a fine portrayal of Gwen Stacy but has little more to do than serve as a love triangle/relationship drama plot device. 

Lastly, Topher Grace feels the most out of place among the ensemble as both Eddie Brock and Venom. Grace is suffficient in bringing a displeasing demeanor to Brock but Grace's portrayal of Venom verges on being featured in a scary Saturday morning cartoon. Raimi does his best to make Grace's over-the-top performance menacing, but it flounders with mixed results. 

I could go on and on about how flawed Spider-Man 3 is but I'm pretty sure you either already know from personal experience or get the gist from my extrapolation and analysis. When it comes down to it, Spider-Man 3's placement in the Raimi Spider-Man trilogy is equivalent to Spider-Man scaling the Empire State Building only to dive off the with no web fluid, no parachute, and only a rusty trampoline underneath to break his fall. 

Film Assessment: D+

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Spider-Man 2'

Sorry this was published a little late due to my trip to Orlando for Star Wars Celebration this past weekend. Anyways, I'm continuing my series of Spider-Man reviews leading up to Spider-Man: Homecoming with my review of Spider-Man 2. Tomorrow I'll review Transformers: Dark of the Moon and next week will be a Throwback Thursday Review over Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End before I continue this series with my thoughts on Spider-Man 3. Other reviews you may see throughout April include The Boss Baby, The Zookeeper's Wife, Going in Style, Free Fire, and The Circle but don't be too surprised if reviews over The Boss Baby, The Zookeeper's Wife, and Going in Style don't end up happening. 

'Spider-Man 2' Review

Nominated for: Best Visual Effects, Best Sound Editing, and Best Sound Mixing.
Won: Best Visual Effects.

In Spider-Man 2, Peter Parker finds it difficult to balance everyday life with his web-slinging antics. The opening thirty minutes show Parker being fired from his part-time job as a pizza delivery guy, consistently missing class, failing to attend a single performance of Mary Jane's play The Importance of Being Earnest, and on-top that forgetting his own birthday. Struggling to find his place in the world, Parker's abilities begin to wither out and he questions whether he should continue being Spider-Man.

Returning director Sam Raimi guided the friendly, neighborhood web-head to new heights for his second go around. One fascinating aspect of Spider-Man 2 is that it's a multi-faceted feature with broad appeal to children and adults. Growing up, I absolutely loved Spider-Man 2 for it's colorful, campy nature and the exhilarating action but I never realized how complex the underlying narrative was till more recent revisits. Everyone can relate to juggling the hectic schedule accompanying their everyday lives and Raimi expertly channeled the frantic nature of a busy agenda. Raimi maintained the exhilarating energy he brought to the action in Spider-Man, even pushing the envelope further in some instances (ie. the train sequence) and really fleshing out the characters to ground the outlandish world around them thanks to his team of screenwriters.

Alfred Gough, Miles Millar, and Michael Chabon lent their expertise to develop the screen story whilst Alvin Sargent penned the screenplay and the end result is an incredibly relatable superhero movie. The story never feels compromised for the sake of spectacle and vice versa, the action's never shortchanged to enhance the drama. Even though Spider-Man 2 is thirteen years old, the visual effects hold up remarkably well and certainly stood the test of time as Spider-Man's heroics seemed not only plausible but it was convincing thanks to the excellent technical execution of both practical effects and CGI. On top of all that, the costumes are amazing and Danny Elfman unsurprisingly composed another marvelous score that's got the grandeur one would expect to accompany the quintessential hero, the sprawling epic nature of an adventurous blockbuster, and the more compassionate character arrangements. I have a few nitpicks here and there such as the writing for Mary Jane, positioning her as the typical damsel-in-distress and her overall cliché characterization, but for the most part there's little to detract from Spider-Man 2.

Tobey Maguire's performance is an improvement over his first incarnation but once again he really fails to apprehend the duality required by the role. Maguire absolutely encapsulated the awkward geekiness of Peter Parker but was still lacking the cool, collected quippy demeanor of Spider-Man. He throws out one-liners but his inflection just doesn't allow them to come across to be as energetic as they are intended to be.

Kirsten Dunst is once again trapped in the stereotypical role of the female love interest, doomed to persistently be Spidey's damsel, while James Franco gets to sink his teeth into a meatier character arc as Harry Osborn transitions into adulthood. Rosemary Harris and J.K. Simmons each return as Aunt May and J. Jonah Jameson to respectively act as Peter's moral compass and bark orders like nobody's business.

Meanwhile, Alfred Molina stepped into the shoes of Williem Dafoe to act as the new big bad, bolstering the antagonistic presence of Dr. Otto Octavius. Molina's Doc Ock is a layered villain whose course of action can be grasped, he gets to toy with all the fun of being the mad scientist and simultaneously handle the physical aspect of the conflict thanks to Doc Ock's robotic tendrils making him a versatile threat. It's that balance of knowledge and power that allows to Doc Ock to demand attention and march about with serious gravitas.

I'll go ahead and now reveal that Spider-Man 2 is currently my favorite Spider-Man film. This is in large part to how rich and complex the character and storytelling lain out prove to be under the guise of a fun comic book movie. Spider-Man 2 has just about everything a great Spider-Man flick needs; an engaging narrative fueled by captivating character arcs, astonishing action, and ideal execution. Spider-Man 2's not just a great superhero movie, it's an incredible film.

Film Assessment: A

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Spider-Man'

Sorry for the delayed review but I had a test I needed to prepare for that took precedence over this. Anyways, this week I'm beginning a new series of reviews over all the Spider-Man films, starting with the Sam Raimi directed Spider-Man Trilogy followed by The Amazing Spider-Man series, in the lead-up to Spider-Man: Homecoming this July. Next week I'll be beginning another series of reviews over the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise starting with Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. Both series of reviews are evenly distributed till the release of their subsequent new installments and you can find a breakdown of my entire planned schedule for this year's Throwback Thursday Reviews at my Third Year Anniversary Post. Reviews over new releases you can expect for the remainder of February include The Great Wall, A Cure for Wellness, and Get Out.

'Spider-Man' Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects and Best Sound. 

Spider-Man tells the origin story of Peter Parker, an everyday high school nerd who gains spider-like abilities after being bitten by a radioactive spider. At first he's a little reckless with his powers, but once tragedy strikes he takes the words of his altruistic Uncle Ben to heart that "with great power comes great responsibility" to become the amazing Spider-Man. When the nefarious Green Goblin begins to terrorize New York, Spider-Man must stand up against the Goblin's reign of tyranny if he's to protect those closest to him. 

Chances are you yawned while reading that brief synopsis because let's face it, just about everyone is familiar with Spider-Man's origin story. We're currently on our third incarnation of the web-head and have seen the origin story play out twice thus far. I remember watching this film and its subsequent installments over and over again growing up (Yes... even Spider-Man 3...) so I could have easily just slapped together a review of how I remembered Spider-Man but decided it'd be more interesting to revisit them objectively as I do with all these Throwback Thursday Reviews. 

Spider-Man was the first take on the friendly, neighborhood wall-crawler to be directed by Sam Raimi. Raimi is perhaps most well known for his work on both this trilogy and The Evil Dead franchise and it's surprising to look back and see how much he was able to carry over from low budget filmmaking roots to big budget superhero escapades. Raimi executed as much in-camera action as possible, inviting a feeling of visceral excitement to the stunt and camera work showcased in Spider-Man. 

Obviously, visual effects are required to allow Spider-Man to swing through the concrete jungle and I have to say that those hold up surprisingly well in comparison to what I was expecting. Raimi and screenwriter David Koepp do a wonderful job spinning their own web of original storytelling that maintains integrity to both the source material and the film itself. I've got to give them props for keeping the story personal instead of going for large scale spectacle. Raimi's Spider-Man is unabashedly fun, almost as though it leapt straight out of the '60s comic books. 

On occasion, Spider-Man ventures so far down that avenue it becomes an outright cartoon but its such an excellent translation of silly source material that it can be easily forgiven. One aspect that I feel to constantly be overlooked is the costuming in Spider-Man. Both Spider-Man and Green Goblin have fantastic costumes, sure you could say that there's absolutely no way a teenager would be able to make a suit like that (something somewhat rectified in later takes on the character) or that the Goblin looked like he walked on set in between shooting for a Power Rangers episode, but they're realistic renderings of Steve Ditko's art work. An area in which Spider-Man triumphs in comparison to later incarnations thus far is the Danny Elfman score (Fingers crossed Michael Giacchino is able to deliver in Spider-Man: Homecoming though). Elfman's score has a sense of adventure, otherworldliness, and simply is a deserving theme for such an iconic character. 

Speaking of iconic characters, just about every superhero has an alter-ego or some secret identity, meaning any actor portraying one needs to showcase both sides of that coin. Now this isn't necessarily beholden to ALL superheroes but certainly is true for these three; Batman (Bruce Wayne), Superman (Clark Kent), and Spider-Man (Peter Parker). Tobey Maguire's a fine actor and all but I've never quite latched onto him as Spider-Man, he really captures the heart and soul of the awkward nerdy Peter Parker but for me he never quite hit the mark as the witty web-slinger. 

For some odd reason, his dialogue delivery just sounds monotonous, he simply doesn't sound excited. Perhaps you can say his dialogue is muffled since he's delivering dialogue through a mask but I was able to clearly understand everything he was saying in the suit so that wasn't the issue. When he's throwing out quips it just doesn't feel in the moment or click the way other actors have recently demonstrated in the role, which is probably why everyone loved Maguire in the role at the time. He wasn't being compared to others yet, he was the first to get a crack at it. 

The supporting ensemble that surrounded Maguire had its highs and lows but were certainly a capable cast. Kirsten Dunst nails both the spunky go-getter girl and sensitive sides of Mary Jane Watson as you see she almost adapts her personality to who she hangs around, something I've seen to be surprisingly accurate about teenage girls. However, her character is written the archetypal damsel-in-distress and love interest so she doesn't really have much to work with in this first chapter. James Franco's fine as Peter's best friend Harry Osborn but almost feels like a cardboard cutout or shell of a person, something that's significantly improved in the subsequent franchise entries. 

Cliff Robertson and Rosemary Harris provide endearing, sweet elderly mentor figures for Peter as Uncle Ben and Aunt May while J.K. Simmons perfectly embodies the snarky cigar chewing Daily Bugle editor J. Jonah Jameson. Simmons channels the flippant frustration in a way that I doubt could ever be replicated and stands as one of the greatest comic book film casting choices of all time alongside Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark and Hugh Jackman as Wolverine to name a few. 

Last but not least, Willem Dafoe brings an unhinged fiend into the proceedings as Norman Osborn or the Green Goblin. Dafoe practically oozes menace and showcases fine acting abilities in scenes that evoke the Gollum/Sméagol dynamic from Lord of the Rings or even James McAvoy's work in Split to a lesser degree for a more recent comparison. Dafoe really sells the campy nature of Green Goblin in such a way that you can almost relate to what drove him down such a twisted path. 

In summary, Spider-Man remains a great superhero film thanks to some spectacular filmmaking and talented ensemble but it does have its problems. In retrospect, most of my issues with Spider-Man are relative nitpicks when juxtaposed to the grand scheme of things and some can easily be cast off in favor of watching the film with nostalgia goggles on but its hard to ignore these problems when they stick out like a sore thumb fifteen years later. The iconic moments may live on and stand the test of time but Spider-Man's weaknesses do not. 

Spider-Man may not quite hold up to the standards of modern comic-book based blockbusters we see today from Marvel Studios or Fox's Marvel division like The Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, Deadpool, or Captain America: Civil War, but for its time Spider-Man was one of the best superhero flicks swinging around! 

Film Assessment: B